One of the first people I met on the campaign trail was a state senator. His entire stump speech talked about a single mom working hard, who we have a great deal of sympathy for. She makes $15,000 part time; doesn’t pay tax, she gets the earned income tax credit. Then he totals up the dollar value for benefits. His figure came to about $51,000; I’ve kind of gone back and I calculated about $43,000. I asked my audience, now if she wants to increase her take-home pay, what does she do? She has another child out of wedlock, right?

Audience Member: Yes.

Senator Ron Johnson: If she wants to lose it all, she finds somebody to support her and she gets married.

Audience Member: Right.

Senator Ron Johnson: Now, unless we, as a society, are willing to take a look at that, and honestly, with our eyes wide open, take a look at the effect of the unintended consequences of all of our good intentions, we’re never going to solve these problems. That’s some of the information we’ve got to convey. So we’ve got a lot of challenges ahead of us here.

Let's get real. Ron Johnson has ZERO sympathy for single moms. In his heart of hearts they're sluts and slackers. They're moochers and we've got to deal with them, people!

More fundamentally, in Johnson's view we shouldn't be supporting them because for them welfare is a job and motherhood is a pay raise. This, from the "family values" guy who would deny women the right to an abortion and then kick them in the head for daring to have a baby and needing help raising it.

In context, Johnson's entire speech was framed to tell rich people to kick middle class and poor folks around because liberty means business being in control. His constituents aren't that single mom; they're the Business Roundtable and the US Chamber of Commerce.

He should remember that even WalMart is panicking because that welfare mom isn't spending the way they hope.

If you look at the history of what has been said and written by the person who authored the bill and by the person who was the chief promoter of the bill, it is VERY CLEAR that the intent of the law was to provide a legal loophole for discrimination against 'the gay'. The only correlation to 'religious freedom' was that being the basis of the legal loophole.